Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
79
The Socio-Economic Impact of Rural-Urban Migration on Rural Livelihoods in Southern Tanzania: The Case of Tunduru District
Asnath Alberto Malekela and Festo G.J. Ndumbaro
The Mwalimu Nyerere Memorial Academy and University of Dar es Salaam
How to cite this paper
Malekela, A.A., and Ndumbaro, F.G.J. 2019. The Socio-Economic Impact of Rural-Urban Migration on Rural Livelihoods in Southern Tanzania: The Case of Tunduru District. Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, 3(2): 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
Contact: Dr Asnath Malekela, The Mwalimu Nyerere Memorial Academy, Po. Box 9193, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Email: [email protected]
Abstract This paper analyses the impact of rural-urban migration on rural livelihoods. It specifically looks at such impacts as jobs or other sources of income which give someone the money to buy the goods and services needed in the daily life. The study was undertaken in Tunduru district in southern Tanzania. Research methods used included structured questionnaires, in-depth interviews, observation, focus group discussions and literature review. The ᵪ2 test indicated that there was a statistically significant relationship between migration and support received for rural livelihoods as the calculated value of 9.609 was higher than the table or critical value of 3.841 at p> 0.05. A high proportion of families with migrants received support compared to those without. From this, the paper recommends that in areas lagging behind in development, rural -urban migration can be considered as a strategy for poverty reduction. This, however, does not preclude other strategies for reducing poverty in rural areas including improved agricultural techniques and government support for non- farm activities.
Paper History
Received: 20 July 2019
Accepted: 12 December 2019
Key Words
Socio-Economic Impact; Rural-Urban Migration; Rural livelihoods; migration; Tanzania.
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
80
1. Introduction
‘Migration pessimists’ have argued that out-migration undermines traditional rural
livelihoods and social institutions by removing the young, healthy, and educated from
local populations. They also charge that migrant remittances are spent largely on
conspicuous consumption (Binford, 2003; Reichert 1981). ‘Migration optimists’ on the
other hand’ argue that rural-urban migration can make important poverty-reducing
contributions to household incomes, with multiplier effects across communities
(Durand, 1996; Taylor et. al., 1996). In addition, conservationists have pointed out that
rural out-migration can lead to land abandonment and reforestation as part of a
‘‘forest transition’’ (Rudel et.al, 2005). The post 2015 global development agenda as
enshrined in sustainable development goal 10 points out the need to reduce inequality
within the country by facilitating responsible migration through proper migration
policies. Bhagat (2017), however, argues that experiences of impact of migration on
rural livelihoods from developing countries are relatively few. The current paper aims
at contributing to the existing debate on rural-urban migration by highlighting the
impact of rural-urban migration on rural livelihoods in Tunduru district, southern
Tanzania.
Tunduru district is one of the districts in southern Tanzania that has experienced a
high rate of rural-urban migration (United Republic of Tanzania (URT), 2011; URT,
2002). This is the case because almost the whole of southern Tanzania was, during the
colonial period, a labour reserve area. Thus, URT (1997, 2011) notes, for example, that
from the colonial and post-colonial era to the present, Tunduru district experiences
rural-urban migration. Furthermore, Tacoli (2003) points out that in Southern
Tanzania, 60 percent of those who participated in the study had at least one person in
their household who had migrated.
People have been migrating from one place to another for a number of reasons. Most
migratory movements in developing countries are internal, mainly rural-urban,
occurring as circular mobility or permanent migration to commercial attraction poles
like the coastal city of Dar es-Salaam (URT, 2014). The motive behind people’s
decision to move and consequences of migration are among the important areas in the
study of migration (Miheretu, 2011; Amrevurayire & Ojeh, 2016). Rural-urban
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
81
migration in Tanzania tends to influence social, economic, political and cultural
dynamics in rural areas as large numbers of people are moving to urban areas and may
contribute to changes in people’s livelihood in the area of origin. An analysis of the
2002 and 2012 Population and Housing Census data, for instance, shows that
interregional migration in Tanzania is characterised and determined by differences in
development and proximity of origin to areas of employment opportunities. Overall
the migration census results show that the turnover (gross migration) of lifetime
migrants increased from 1,103,229 in 2002 to about 1,526,365 in 2012. This is an
increase of about 423,136 migrants in 10 years (URT, 2015).
Migration is, generally, a process that redistributes and transforms the population
from poor areas to areas that are relatively better off economically (Black et al., 2004;
Macharia, 2003). Besides the spatial dimension, the movement also transforms the
skills, attitudes and motivations of migrants so that they can be integrated into new
areas (Mabogunje, 1970). Thus return migrants bring knowledge, skills and innovation
i.e. social remittances (Bhagat, 2017). This paper adopts a conceptual framework from
Mabogunje’s System Approach Model which describes the environment as a system
having two sub-systems, namely, rural and urban. Within these systems, migration is
considered a continuous process and there is a control mechanism that encourages or
discourages migration (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Rural-Urban Migration Model
Source: Modified from Mabogunje (1970)
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
82
This model was introduced by Mabogunje (1970) to explain the rural-urban migration
in Africa. He sees migration as a circular, interdependent and progressive, complex
and self-modifying system with several interrelated linkages (Mabogunje, 1970). The
System Approach model is made up of three system components which include the
potential migrant who is encouraged to leave the village from the environment.
Secondly, there are two sub-systems namely urban and rural sub-systems in which
interaction is taking place resulting in the flow of migration, and thirdly there is
adjustment and feedbacks. Feedbacks can either be positive, encouraging the system
to produce further migrants or negative, causing migration to decline (Mabogunje,
1970).
The model portrays that in the rural areas control sub-system and adjustment
mechanism involve the family or household relationship and reallocation of risks
(family responsibilities) when the migrant leaves. Landholding factors may also expel
migrants due to landlessness. In urban areas sub-system, the urban area is
characterised by more complex and specialised industrial and commercial economy.
This may encourage or discourage the absorption of migrants. This includes the social
networks, means of accessing work, living space as well as the nature of work
opportunities (Mabogunje, 1970).
Nonetheless, the model depicts that there is a linkage between rural and urban sub-
systems. Rural-urban migration may deprive the rural labour force causing a decline
in agricultural production which in turn may lead to food shortages with consequences
on both rural and urban areas. On the other side, it may be advantageous as in the case
where the departure of those young people does not lead to more land fragmentation
(Mbonile, 1993).
The model has been used by both geographers and economists trying to analyse
migration as a total process that involves migrants, institutions and sub systems
operating in a certain environment (Karlsson, 2008; Sokoni, 2011). However, the
model has been criticised for using strong terms like mechanism, forces, system and
feedback that make migration laws rigid as in physical sciences which might not be the
case in the social sciences (Tacoli, 2003; Nanavati, 2004).
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
83
2. Material and Methods
The study was conducted in Tunduru district, Ruvuma Region, this area was selected
as it experiences high rate of rural-urban migration. This movement can be traced back
from pre-colonial era, whereby, with the development of long distance trade, the Yao
community formed the southern route; which stimulated them to migrate from one
place to another. During colonial and post- colonial era to the present, the district is
experiencing increased rate of rural-urban migration as a coping strategy against rural
poverty (TDMP 2011; RSEP, 1997). The study used both quantitative and qualitative
research approaches which complemented each other in providing information on
rural-urban migration’s impacts on rural livelihoods. Three wards out of a total of
thirty-five wards, which constituted 10 percent, were randomly selected using a table
of random numbers. The selected wards included Nandembo, Namiungo and Ligoma
wards. In each of the wards one village was randomly picked, namely, Namiungo
(Namiungo ward), Makokoteni (Ligoma ward) and Amka village in Nandembo ward
as shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Location of the selected villages in Tunduru District
Source: Cartographic Unit, University of Dar es Salaam
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
84
A household formed the study unit and it composed of a husband, wife, children and
dependants living in the family, single father and mother, unmarried or
widow/widower. Namiungo had four hundred and ten (410) households, Makokoteni
had three hundred twenty two (322) households and Amka village had four hundred
twenty (420) households as shown in Table 1. Having these households in the study
area, at least 10 percent of them were manageable and representative for this study as
suggested by Kombo and Tromp (2006) and Kothari (2004). Also, Healey (1999)
suggests that a sample size of 100 or more respondents can be used to draw statistical
significance of the conclusions resulting from the data.
Table 1: Number of households in the studied villages
Village Number of households
Number of households to be selected (10%)
Namiungo 410 41 Makoteni 322 32 Amka 420 42 Total 1152 115
Thus, from the three villages selected, 88 (76.5 percent) households had migrants and
27 (23.5 percent) households had no migrants. Purposive sampling was used in
selecting key informants which included ward and village leaders. Also, 36
respondents from Dar es Salaam city whose origin was Tunduru District were selected
through snowball sampling to provide insights on their linkages with rural areas. The
selection of Dar es Salaam city respondents depended on information provided by the
respondents from the study area in Tunduru district.
This study used both primary and secondary data so as to answer the research
questions. Primary data were obtained through focus group discussions, interviews
with key informants, observation and structured questionnaires to 115 respondents in
Tunduru district and 36 respondents in Dar es Salaam city. Secondary data were
obtained through review of documents such as books, journals, district and ward
profiles which contributed towards the formation of background information on rural-
urban migration.
The Pearson Chi-square test (ᵪ2) was used to find out whether there was statistically
significant relationship between rural- urban migration and support for rural
livelihoods. The data subjected to χ 2 test were collected using structured questionnaire.
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
85
This sought to find out whether the number of households with migrants that received
support was higher compared to those without.
Three focus group discussions were conducted, one in each village. The discussions
aimed at providing a clear insight on the way migrants contribute to the development
of their areas of origin. The groups consisted of eight participants (four males, four
females) who were purposely selected from each village. These comprised of both
youth and the elderly. The number composition of focus group discussions was in line
with Kombo and Tromp (2006) who suggest that focus group discussion should
compose of six to eight participants. The discussions aimed at providing a clear insight
on the way migrants contribute to the development of their areas of origin.
During the study and data collection, attention was drawn to regulations and rules
governing the ethical research issues including research clearance. Prior to actual data
collection, a research permit was secured from relevant authorities including the
University of Dar es Salaam, the regional and district government authorities in
Ruvuma region. Confidentiality was also maintained between the researcher and
participants throughout the study.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Profile of the respondents
Table 2 shows that the ages of the respondents in rural areas of Tunduru district
ranged from 16 to 84 years. About 41 percent of respondents were aged between 41
and 50 years with 26.1 percent males and 14.8 percent females. About 14 percent were
aged between 61 and 70 years with 11.3 percent males and 2.6 percent females.
Table 2: Distribution of rural respondents (Tunduru) by age and sex
Age Males Females Total Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Total
Frequency Total Percent
16-20 2 1.7 1 0.8 3 2.6 21-30 7 6.0 5 4.3 12 10.4 31-40 7 6.1 6 5.2 13 11.3 41-50 30 26.1 17 14.8 47 40.9 51-60 8 7.0 5 4.3 13 11.3 61-70 13 11.3 3 2.6 16 13.9 71-80 2 1.7 7 6.0 9 7.8 81-84 1 1.0 1 0.8 2 1.7 Total 70 60.8 45 39.2 115 100
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
86
In Dar es Salaam urban area, the results reveal that about 42 percent were aged
between 18 and 28, out of whom, 25 percent were males and 16.6 percent were females.
About 25 percent were aged between 28-38 years with 16.7 percent males and 8.3
females (Table 3). These findings support the general perception that youths are more
dominant in rural-urban migration as they are the active labour force (Gray, 2009;
Perz, 2007). Also men are more migratory than women, as 61.1 percent of the
respondents were males and 38.8 percent were females. The same was observed by
Macharia (2003) who traced the trend of rural - urban migration in Kenya from the
colonial to post-colonial era and found that men dominated in rural-urban migration
than women.
Table 3: Distribution of urban respondents (Dar es Salaam) by age and sex
Category Males Females Total Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Total
Frequency Total Percent
18-28 9 25 6 16.6 15 41.6 29-38 6 16.7 3 8.3 9 25 39-48 4 11.1 3 8.3 7 19.4 49+ 3 8.3 2 5.5 5 13.8 Total 22 61.1 14 38.8 36 100
3.2. Marital status
Marital status is of vital importance in demographic studies as it is used to study
whether a person is single, married, divorced or widowed. From the study, 52.2
percent of the respondents in rural areas were married while 21.7 percent were
divorced (Table 4). These results denote marriage instabilities in rural areas which
may propel rural-urban migration. In the study area marriage instabilities are related
to Islamic religion which allows men to have more than one wife. This brings marital
unhappiness among the Yao, thus stimulating rural-urban migration. Likewise, in
urban areas about 62 percent of respondents were married. Furthermore, 33.3 percent
of the out migrants were single; this is associated with educational reasons whereby
young men spend a long time to seek education so that they acquire high qualifications
which leads to the delay of marriage (Mbonile, 1993). Only small proportions of 5.6
percent of out-migrants were divorced.
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
87
Table 4: Marital status of the respondents
RURAL AREAS URBAN AREAS Marital Status
Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
Single 13 11.3 12 33.3 Married 60 52.2 22 61.1 Widowed 17 14.8 0 0 Divorced 25 21.7 2 5.6 Total 115 100 36 100
3.3. Migrant’s areas of destination
The findings further revealed that most of the respondents migrated to large
commercial centres where they could achieve their goals such as employment
opportunities, better social facilities, and so forth. 51.5 percent migrated to Dar es
Salaam city because it is the major commercial centre in Tanzania. Further, 14.6
percent moved to Songea Town which is a regional centre. These findings are in line
with Ravenstein’s (1885) laws of migration which point out that most migrants move
at short distances, but those who opt for long distances, look for large commercial or
industrial centres. Also, 9.9 percent moved to Tunduru town, the district headquarter,
8.2 percent and 7.3 percent migrated to Lindi and Mtwara regional centres
respectively (Figure 3).
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
88
Figure. 3: Migration destinations from Tunduru District
Source: Survey Data 2012.
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
89
3.4. Contribution of rural-urban migration on rural livelihoods
The impact of rural-urban migration at the origin was examined in terms of physical,
financial, natural, social and political assets which the respondents possessed and the
support they got from out migrants.
The ᵪ2 test showed that there was a statistically significant relationship between
migration and support for rural livelihoods as the calculated value of 9.609 was higher
than the table or critical value of 3.841 at p< 0.05. Table 5 indicates that 62.2 percent
of the households with migrants received support for their livelihoods from their
family members who had migrated to urban areas and only 30.3 percent of household
without migrants received support for their livelihoods from other sources including
religious and community groups. Furthermore, the findings revealed that there were
only 37.8 percent of households with migrants who did not receive support for their
livelihoods but there were 69.7 percent of households without migrants who did not
receive support for their livelihoods as shown in Table 5. This implies that rural-urban
migration played an important role in providing support for rural livelihood in the
study area. This is supported by Bhagat (2014) who points out that remittances
provide insurance against risks of households in the areas of origin, increase consumer
expenditure and investment in health, education and asset formation.
Table 5: Relationship between migration and support for livelihoods
Households With Support
% Without Support
% Total %
With migrants 51 62.2 31 37.8 82 100
Without migrants
10 30.3 23 69.7 33 100
Total 61 53.0 54 47.0 115 100
Pearson Chi-square
Value
9.609
Df
1
Asymptotic significance
0.002
P < 0.05
Thus, rural-urban migration in Tunduru district led to better livelihoods in terms of
physical assets whereby out of 66.7 percent who mentioned that they had houses, 52.3
percent were households with migrants and 14.5 percent were without migrants; of the
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
90
8.0 percent of the respondents who possessed milling machines, 6.0 percent were
households with migrants and 2.0 percent without migrants. Further, of the 7.9
percent who possessed motorcycle,7.3 percent were households with migrants and 0.6
percent were those without migrants; again of the 6 percent of the households with
shops or kiosk, 4 percent were households with migrants and 2 percent without
migrants; of the 7.9 percent of the respondents who possessed tailoring machines, 4.6
percent had out migrants and 3.3 percent were the households without migrants; and
3.3 percent of the households which possessed power tiller had out migrants.
Moreover, 17.6 percent of the urban respondents reported that they had contributed
to physical assets to their rural families. All these assets provided an adequate support
in sustaining rural livelihood. This is supported by Anh (2003) who argues that
migration is a driver of growth and an important route out of poverty with significant
positive impacts on people’s livelihoods and wellbeing. One of the participants during
the focus group discussion at Amka village remarked:
I wish all my sons and daughters could be living in town so that they could help me, because here they have nothing to do rather than waiting for the assistance from their relatives who are living in town (FGD Participant, male, 72 years, 20/12/2012).
Figure 4 shows a house built by one migrant as a positive contribution to the rural
livelihoods (left) and one built by one of the participants whose household had no
migrants (right), these were physically observed in the study area.
Figure 4: Household with migrants vs. household without migrants at Makokoteni
village
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
91
The findings also revealed that 29.3 percent of the people received remittances in
terms of money for paying school fees, buying agricultural inputs, paying for medical
treatments and installing solar power. In urban areas, 23.5 percent reported that they
sent money to support their rural families. The same observation was made by Adam
(2005) in Ghana that the migrants sent both cash and non-cash remittances. One
villager in Namiungo village noted:
My son, who lives in Dar es Salaam, sends me some money through mobile phone for buying fertilizers and seeds and paying wages to the workers who support me in farming activities. This is particularly the case because before he left for Dar es Salaam he used to support me in farming activities but in his absence he sends me money so that I can pay people who work on my farm (FGD Participant, female, 45 years, 14/12/2012).
However this is in contrast to Atnafu, et al (2014) who argue in their study of migration
in one of the areas that lagged behind in development in Ethiopia, that migration did
not lead to immediate flow of remittance from migrants to their households partly
because some of the domestic workers were planning to go and work in the Middle
East and therefore they had to save a lot of money so as to make it a success. However,
in the case of Tunduru, Table 6 shows that 10.5 percent of the respondents
acknowledged the contribution of out-migrants in the investment capital namely
natural land for production purposes specifically coconut plantations and rice
farming. Also 15.6 percent of the urban respondents said that they had bought land in
their rural areas which their parents used for farming purposes. Chivumbo (1988) and
Mbonile (2005) observed that the major socio-economic impact of rural-urban
migration was the investment in terms of fixed assets like land. This is supported by
Francis (2002) who notes that migration is of considerable importance to the poor in
East Africa. Historically, the migration of millions of rural households in Eastern and
Southern Africa had been providing investment capital for rural commodity
production and thus enhancing rural livelihoods.
The study further found out that migrants played a central role in dealing with
household social issues. About 14.0 percent indicated that migrants participated in
funeral and marriage ceremonies as well as traditional dances conducted within clans
at their origin. Also 17.9 percent of the respondents confirmed that migrants provided
basic needs such as food and clothes needed by household members. In urban areas,
19.6 percent admitted that they used to send food stuffs and clothes when they visited
their parents and relatives who lived in rural areas. And 13.7 percent of the urban
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
92
respondents agreed that they participated in funerals, traditional dances and marriage
ceremonies in their areas of origin (Table 6). This is the same as what Kitali (2007)
observed in Moshi Rural District. One of the participants during the focus group
discussion at Makokoteni Village noted:
Frankly speaking, my son who lives in Songea town is the one who makes us look good. In the past, we lacked even a piece of cloth to put on, but currently we are happy because our son brings us clothes, so we are really very proud of him (FGD Participant, male, 56 years, 18/12/2012).
In addition Table 6 shows that 10.5 percent of the respondents indicated that, the out
migrants visited their areas of origin during election periods so that they could provide
support on political campaigns and voting activities. In urban areas 9.8 percent of the
respondents reported that during election period they used to go back to their rural
areas to participate in campaigns and voting processes.
Table 6: Contributions provided by out migrants to rural households
Contributions Rural Respondents Urban Respondents
Frequency* Percentage Frequency* Percentage Money for paying school fees and buying agricultural inputs, Installing solar power (Financial)
67 29.3 12 23.5
Food stuffs, clothes (Social) 41 17.9 10 19.6
Houses, Milling machines, Motorcycles, Tailoring machines (Physical)
40 17.5 9 17.6
Participating in campaigning and Voting (Political)
24 10.5 5 9.8
Participating in Traditional and marriage ceremonies, Funerals (Social)
32 14 7 13.7
Buying Land for farming (Natural)
24 10.5 8 15.6
Total 228 100 51 100
*Based on multiple responses
3.5. Consequences of rural-urban migration on rural livelihoods
There were also some negative impacts resulting from rural-urban migration in
Tunduru District. The study findings showed that 33.8 percent of the respondents
admitted that there was labour shortage as an outcome of rural-urban migration. This
is because the youth and energetic male and females migrated to urban areas leaving
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
93
behind young children and old people who could not effectively participate in
economic development activities. Also 17.8 percent of the respondents faced the
problem of overburden and lack of assistance due to the absence of their parents, wives
and husbands. The families were left with a lot of tasks which could have otherwise
been performed by the parent, husband or wife who had out migrated. Macharia
(2003) observed the same in women who had been left behind. These had to make
difficult household decisions and many, though married, expressed a feeling of being
a female head of household due to the husband’s absence. In addition to that, 15.8
percent of the respondents mentioned insecurity of properties and loneliness due to
the absence of young men and women in their households.
Table 7 shows that 8.4 percent of the respondents mentioned the destruction of
traditions and customs resulting from the urban migrants who returned home with
new way of life abandoning traditional styles. One of the key informants at Amka
village remarked:
Our sons and daughters who live in urban areas are totally lost, because they come with new forms of life especially wearing styles which they adapt from urban areas. Previously it was not possible for a Yao indigenous lady to put on a trouser, but currently they do so (Interview participant, female, 59 years, 02/12/2012).
Nevertheless, Bhagat (2017) notes of positive change on the part of migrants as they
enhance their knowledge and skills through exposure and interaction with the outside
world. The migrants learn new skills from co-workers and friends at the place of
destination.
However, 11.1 percent of the respondents reported to have marriage instabilities as
couples lived apart for most of the time. This situation led to someone marrying
another woman/man resulting into marriage instabilities.
Furthermore, the findings indicated that 6.8 percent of the respondents reported that
the rural-urban migration has contributed to the spread of HIV/AIDS. This is
supported by Macharia (2003) who observed that in recent years in Kenya, most HIV
positive migrants decided to go back to their villages to await deaths and burial in their
ancestral homes. This contributed to spread HIV/AIDS in rural areas.
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
94
Table 7: Negative effects of rural-urban migration on households
Effect Frequency* Percentage Decrease of productive force 64 33.8 Overburdening to families and lack of assistance
34 17.8
Insecurity of properties and loneliness 30 15.8 Marriage instabilities 21 11.1 Destructions of customs and traditions 16 8.4 Spread of diseases 13 6.8 No effects 11 5.8 Total 189* 100
*Based on Multiple responses.
3.6. Coping strategies
Human beings are known to have several mechanisms in coping with different
situations specifically when they encounter difficulties in life (Kitali, 2007). The
respondents had developed a number of strategies which enabled them to cope with
difficulties emanating from absence of their household members like that of lack of
assistance, insecurity, lack of labour force, over responsibilities, loneliness and fear. In
the study area, 39 percent of the respondents pointed out that one of the coping
strategies was to ask for assistance from religious and social groups which lend money
to the community members, such as Jumuiya and Almarid. These religious and social
groups provided assistance in cash for which the beneficiaries had to work on the
lenders’ farms to recover their debts because the borrowers were unable to pay back
in cash. Thus, one of the participants in the focus group discussion at Namiungo village
remarked:
When we have problems like that of sickness, we normally go to the religious and social groups such as Jumuiya, or Almarid to borrow some money which we pay back in kind (FGD Participant, female, 47 years, 11/12/2012).
Findings also reveal that 27 percent of the respondents sold some of their crops like
maize and cashew nuts as well as part of their farms in order to get money which they
could use to solve some family problems. Other respondents, 17 percent, reported that
they used to sell livestock such as cattle, goats and chicken so as to get money to be
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
95
able to solve their family problems. About 10 percent said that they reduced the size of
land under cultivation so as to cope with the problem of labour shortage as shown in
Figure 7.
Figure 7: Coping Strategies
4. Conclusion and recommendation
The study intended to investigate the socio-economic impact of rural-urban migration
on rural livelihoods. Based on the findings, it is evident that rural-urban migration has
both positive and negative impacts. On the positive side, rural-urban migration
contributed to increased and improved social, financial, political, natural and physical
assets at the place of origin through remittances given by the out migrants. On the
negative side, it led to shortage of labour force, spread of diseases such as HIV/AIDS,
destruction of customs and traditions, marriage instabilities, lack of assistance,
insecurity and loneliness. However, the people who were left in rural areas adopted
several mechanisms including selling crops and livestock, getting assistance from
religion and social groups and reducing the size of farmlands so as to cope with the
negative impacts. These findings suggest that rural-urban migration can be one of the
policy choices for poverty reduction particularly in areas with very low incomes in
order to achieve human development, equity and wellbeing. This, however, does not
preclude other strategies such as improvement in agricultural activities and
supporting non-farm activities for reducing poverty in the rural areas. These too
should be encouraged alongside a consideration of supporting rural-urban migration
for poverty reduction in rural Tanzania.
Series1, Assisted, 47,
39%
Series1, Crop/farm
selling , 32, 27%
Series1, Tolerance, 8, 7%
Series1, Selling livestock, 20,
17%
Series1, Cultivating small
area, 12, 10%
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
96
References
Adam, R. (2005). Remittances and Poverty in Ghana. World Bank Policy Research
Working Paper. Washington D.C.
Amrevurayire, E.O and Ojeh, V.N. (2016). Consequences of Rural Urban Migration on
the Source Region of Ughievwen Clan Delta State Nigeria. European Journal
of Geography, 7(3), pp. 42-57.
Anh D. N. (2003). Migration and Poverty in Asia: with reference to Bangladesh, China,
the Philippines and Viet Nam. Ad Hoc Expert Group Meeting on Migration and
Development, organised by the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and
The Pacific, Bangkok, 27–29 August.
Atnafu, A., Oucho, L., and Zeitlyn, B. (2014). Poverty, Youth and Rural Urban
Migration in Ethiopia. Working Paper 17. Research Programme Consortium.
Bhagat, R.B. (2017). Migration and Urban Transition in India: Implications for
Development. UN Expert Group Meeting on Sustainable Cities, Human
Mobility and international Migration. New York.
Bhagat, R. B. (2014). Urban Migration Trends, Challenges and Opportunities in India.
Background Paper for World Migration Report 2015: Migrants and Cities.
International Organization for Migration (IOM).
Binford, L. (2003). Migrant Remittances and (Under) development in Mexico.
Critique of Anthropology, 23(3), pp. 305–336.
Black, R., Hilker, L.M., and Pooley, C. (2004). Migration and Pro-poor Policy in East
Africa. Sussex Centre for Migration Report.
Chivumbo, A. (1988). Migration and Uneven Development in Africa. A Case Study of
Zambia. New York and London: University Press of America.
Durand, J., Parrado, E., and Massey, D. (1996). Migradollars and development: A
reconsideration of the Mexican case. International Migration Review, 30, pp.
423–444.
Francis, E. (2002). Gender, Migration and Multiple Livelihoods: Cases from Eastern
and Southern Africa. Journal of Development Studies, 38(6): pp. 167-90.
Gray, C.L. (2009). Rural-outmigration and Smallholder Agriculture in the Southern
Ecuadorian Andes. Andes: Springer Science.
Healey J.F. (1999). Statistics: A tool for Social Research. ITP Belmont
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
97
Karlsson. (2008). Rural-Urban Migration in Babati District Tanzania. Uppsala
Universitet.
Kitali, J.L. (2007). Socio-economic and Environmental Impacts of Rural-Urban
Migration in Kilimanjaro Region, the case of Moshi Rural District, Tanzania.
Kombo, D. K and Tromp, D. L. A. (2006). Proposal and Thesis Writing: An
Introduction. Nairobi: Paulines Publications.
Kothari, C.R. (2004). Research Methodology: Method and Techniques (2nd ed). Delhi:
New Age International.
Mabogunje, A, (1970). System Approach Theory of Rural-Urban Migration.
Geographical Analysis, 2(1), pp. 1-18.
Macharia, K (2003). Migration in Kenya and its Impact on the Labour Market. Paper
prepared for Conference on African Migration in Comparative Perspective,
Johannesburg, South Africa, 4-7, American University. United States of
America.
Mbonile, M.J. (1993). Migration and Structural Changes in Tanzania: The Case of
Makete District. University of Liverpool. PhD Demography Thesis, Published.
Mbonile, M. (2005). Migration Widows of Rombo Districts, Kilimanjaro region. IFRA.
Miheretu B.A. (2011). Causes and Consequences of Rural Urban Migration: The Case
of Woldiya Town North Ethiopia. MA (Geography) Thesis, University of South
Africa.
Nanavati, S. (2004). Impact of Rural-Urban Migration on the Sustainability of Cities.
U.S.A (Unpublished).
Perz, S. (2007). Grand theory and context-specificity in the study of forest dynamics:
Forest transition theory and other directions. The Professional Geographer, 59,
pp. 105–114.
Ravenstein E.G. (1885). The Laws of Migration. Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society, 48(2), pp. 167-235.
Reichert, J. 1981. The Migrant Syndrome: Seasonal US Wage Labour and Rural
Development in Central Mexico. Human Organization, 40, pp. 56–66.
Rudel, T., Coomes, O., Moran, E., Achard, F., Angelsen, A., Xu, J., et al. (2005). Forest
Transitions: Towards a Global Understanding of Land Use Change. Global
Environmental Change Part A, 15, pp. 23–31.
Mkwawa Journal of Education and Development, Vol. 3(2), 79-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37759/mjed.2019.3.2.5
98
Ruvuma Socio-Economic Profile (RSEP) (1997). The Planning Commission-Dar es
Salaam and Salazar, N.B. (2010), Tanzanian Migration Imaginaries. Oxford:
Berghahn.
Sokoni, C.H. (2011). Rural-Urban Interactions: Potential or Constraint to Rural
Development? Lessons from Western Bagamoyo District, Tanzania. Tanzania
Journal of Population and Development, 18(1), pp. 1-17.
Tacoli C. (2003). Editorial: The Links between Urban and Rural Development.
Environment and Urbanization, 15(1), pp. 3-12.
Taylor, J., Arango, J., Hugo, G., Kouaouci, A., Massey, D., and Pellegrino, A. (1996).
International Migration and Community Development. Population Index, 62,
pp. 397–418.
Tunduru District Migration profile (TDM), (2011), Tunduru.
United Republic of Tanzania (URT) (2002). Population and Housing Census,
Analytical Report. Dar es Salaam: National Bureau of Statistics, President’s
Office.
United Republic of Tanzania (URT) (1997). Ruvuma 1997 Socio-Economic Profile. Dar
es Salaam: The Planning Commission.
United Republic of Tanzania (URT) (2011). Tunduru District Migration profile, 2011.
Dar es Salaam: National Bureau of Statistics, President’s Office.
United Republic of Tanzania (URT) (2014). Basic Demographic and Socio-economic
Profile: Key Findings. Dar es Salaam: National Bureau of Statistics.
United Republic of Tanzania (URT) (2015). Migration and Urbanization Report. 2012
Population and Housing Census. Volume IV. Dar es Salaam: National Bureau
of Statistics.